Wir schaffen Wissen – heute für morgen   Paul Scherrer Institut   Peter Burgherr, Petrissa Eckle & Stefan Hirschberg   Com...
Content• Objectives• Hazards and Accident Risks in the Energy Sector• Framework for Comparative Risk Assessment• Risk Indi...
Objectives• Comparison of accident risks across for a broad set of technologies and  various country groups (e.g. OECD, EU...
Analytical Framework for Technology AssessmentIDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland                    Burgherr ...
Energy Security – an Umbrella TermIDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland                   Burgherr et al.: Compa...
Energy-related Severe Accident Database (ENSAD)                                                                           ...
Severe Accident Definition and Consequence IndicatorsRisk                                Impact Category                  ...
Overview of Data Sources and Assumptions Coal, Oil, Natural Gas                            ENSAD database PSI; severe ( ≥5...
Accident Risk IndicatorsFatality risk due to severe (≥5 fatalities) accidents• Expected Fatality Rate [Fatalities / GWeyr]...
Scenario Analysis• IEA World Energy Outlook 2011 scenarios for EU 27 in year 2035    - Current Policies Scenario: no chang...
Fatality Rates & Maximum Consequences                                                                                  Bur...
Specific Stakeholder Weighting ProfilesIDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland                        Burgherr et ...
MCDA Results: Specific Stakeholder Profiles                                                                               ...
Results of Exploratory MCDA                                                                        Burgherr et al., 2012ID...
Additional Risk Aspects                                                             Burgherr, 2011Risk Aspect             ...
Conclusions• Among centralized technologies expected accident risks are lowest for hydro      and nuclear in Western count...
Thank you for your attention!In several languages risk often has the double meaning of “chance, opportunity” and “danger, ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Comparative risk assessment of energy technologies in the context of energy security and sustainability

944 views

Published on

Peter BURGHERR, Petrissa ECKLE, Stefan HIRSCHBERG

Paul Scherrer Institut (PSI), Switzerland

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
944
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
41
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Comparative risk assessment of energy technologies in the context of energy security and sustainability

  1. 1. Wir schaffen Wissen – heute für morgen Paul Scherrer Institut Peter Burgherr, Petrissa Eckle & Stefan Hirschberg Comparative risk assessment of energy technologies in the context of energy security and sustainabilityIDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland
  2. 2. Content• Objectives• Hazards and Accident Risks in the Energy Sector• Framework for Comparative Risk Assessment• Risk Indicators• Indicator-Based Scenario Analysis• Additional Risk Aspects• ConclusionsIDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  3. 3. Objectives• Comparison of accident risks across for a broad set of technologies and various country groups (e.g. OECD, EU 27, non-OECD)• Risk indicators for current and future technologies• Scenario analysis for EU 27 to test the hypothesis that climate policy measures not only limit CO2 emissions, but as a secondary benefit can reduce the overall accident risk of the energy system compared to current conditions.IDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  4. 4. Analytical Framework for Technology AssessmentIDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  5. 5. Energy Security – an Umbrella TermIDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  6. 6. Energy-related Severe Accident Database (ENSAD) CRA within the larger context of energy security and critical infrastructure protection Technical Risks Natural Risks Human Risks Severe accidents NaTech Terrorist threat, vandalism, sabotage Comparative Risk Assessment PSA ENSAD (*) Hybrid Approach - Simplified level-3 PSA - Historical experience - Statistics, literature, modeling, - Nuclear - Severity thresholds expert judgment - Fossil chains, hydro - New renewables, hydro, CCS - Scope and objectives - Tailored database queries - Geo-referencing / coupling with external data Evaluation Data Set for Technology Comparison - Basic statistics, aggregated consequence indicators, F-N curves (*) ENSAD: - Economic loss estimates, external costs - Established 1998 - Geo-statistics, risk mapping - Bayesian analysis - 24’830 data records - Risk indicators, decision support - Period 1970 – 2008IDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  7. 7. Severe Accident Definition and Consequence IndicatorsRisk Impact Category ENSAD severity Consequence indicatordescription thresholdHuman health Fatalities ≥5 Fatalities per GWeyr Injuries ≥ 10 Injured per GWeyrSocietal Evacuees ≥ 200 Evacuees per GWeyr Food consumption ban yes Nominal scaleEnvironmental Release of hydrocarbons ≥ 10’000 t Tonne per GWeyr Land/water contamination ≥ 25 km2 km2 per GWeyrEconomic Economic loss ≥ 5 Mio USD (2000) USD per GWeyrUpstream: Downstream:exploration Midstream: refining and distributionand extraction transport and storage of products Power generationIDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  8. 8. Overview of Data Sources and Assumptions Coal, Oil, Natural Gas ENSAD database PSI; severe ( ≥5 fatalities) accidents, 1970-2008 Nuclear simplified Level-3 PSA: Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) and European Pressurized Reactor (EPR) at an existing plant location in Switzerland Hydro ENSAD database PSI; severe ( ≥5 fatalities) accidents; 1970-2008 Photovoltaic (PV) * Si-technologies; 2000-2008; hazardous substances (chlorine (Cl), hydrochloric acid (HCl), Silane (SiH4), and Trichlorosilane (HSiCl3)) Wind * Windpower Death Database (Gipe, 2010) and Wind Turbine Accident Compilation (Caithness Windfarm Information Forum, 2010); 1975-2010 Biomass & Waste Combined Heat and Power (CHP) Biogas; ENSAD Database PSI; severe (≥5 fatalities) accidents, 1970-2008; natural gas as proxy (Loc. Distr.) Geothermal Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS); ENSAD Database PSI; severe (≥5 fatalities) accidents, 1970-2008; natural oil as proxy (Exploration) Concentrating Solar Expert judgment; EU project NEEDS Power (CSP) Marine (Tides, Waves, Expert judgment Currents)* 1 out of 100 accidents considered severe Burgherr et al. 2011 IDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  9. 9. Accident Risk IndicatorsFatality risk due to severe (≥5 fatalities) accidents• Expected Fatality Rate [Fatalities / GWeyr]• Maximum Consequences [Fatalities]Land contaminated due to accidents releasing radioactive isotopes• Expected Land Contamination [km2 / GWeyr]• Maximum Land Contamination [km2]Accidental tanker spills of hydrocarbons to environment (≥700 t)• Expected Oil Spill Size [t / bn t-mi]• Maximum Oil Spill Size [t]IDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  10. 10. Scenario Analysis• IEA World Energy Outlook 2011 scenarios for EU 27 in year 2035 - Current Policies Scenario: no change in actual government policies - New Policies scenario: existing policies and declared intentions - 450 scenario: constraining average global temperature increase to 2°C• All three scenarios still dominated by fossil fuels in 2035, although their share decreases at the expense of renewables and nuclear power from the Current Policies towards the 450 scenario.• Scenario analysis steps: - Extrapolation of fatality rates to 2035 - Fatality rate & maximum consequences: chain specific values were weighted by the respective fuel shares in each scenario to obtain a combined scenario indicator. - Oil spill and nuclear land contamination indicators are chain-specific. - Indicator normalization by dividing all values of a specific indicator by its maximum value. To ensure that higher values denote a better performance the scale was then inversed because for the raw indicators higher values (e.g. fatality rate) are worse. - Simple weighted-sum Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) algorithm was used to rank the different EU 27 scenario alternatives. - Results for 5 specific stakeholder perspectives and exploratory MCDA sampling the whole preference space.IDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  11. 11. Fatality Rates & Maximum Consequences Burgherr et al., 2011IDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  12. 12. Specific Stakeholder Weighting ProfilesIDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  13. 13. MCDA Results: Specific Stakeholder Profiles Burgherr et al., 2012IDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  14. 14. Results of Exploratory MCDA Burgherr et al., 2012IDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  15. 15. Additional Risk Aspects Burgherr, 2011Risk Aspect Affected TechnologiesIncreased production of oil - Deep offshore oil resources (Gulf of Mexico, Brazil)resources - Oil resources in extreme environments (Arctic)Induced seismicity, - Oil and gas production, coal miningsubsidence - Hydropower reservoirs - Enhanced geothermal systems - Carbon capture and storage (CCS)Resource competition - Bioenergy (e.g. food vs. fuel; water resources) - Hydro reservoir (electricity vs. irrigation vs. supply...)Hazardous substances - Explosive, flammable, toxic and asphyxiant substances in PV module production - Spills of chemicals via hydraulic fracturing (shale gas, geothermal) can lead to groundwater contaminationClimate effects - Large wind deployment could locally increase lower atmosphere temperatureLong-term storage (public - Disposal of nuclear waste and CCSacceptance)Proliferation - Nuclear energyGeopolitics, terrorist threat - large renewable capacities in geopolitically less stable regions - Pirate attacks on oil/gas tankersIDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  16. 16. Conclusions• Among centralized technologies expected accident risks are lowest for hydro and nuclear in Western countries, while fossil chains exhibit the highest risks.• Maximum consequences are by far highest for nuclear and hydro, intermediate for fossil chains and very small for new renewables.• Decentralized energy systems are less sensitive to severe accidents than large centralized ones.• Achievement of climate policy goals can often as a secondary benefit contribute to reductions in overall severe accident risks, however specific stakeholder preferences may affect the portfolio of available low-carbon technologies.• For example, risk aversion could impede the utilization of nuclear as well as fossil fuels in combination with carbon capture and storage (CCS) systems.• Large-scale deployment of new renewables could be affected due to various concerns, such as landscape disturbance, noise or ecological effects for wind power, or geopolitical aspects when large renewable capacities are installed in less stable regions (e.g. North Africa).IDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment
  17. 17. Thank you for your attention!In several languages risk often has the double meaning of “chance, opportunity” and “danger, loss”Probable origins of risk lie in the Greek word ριζα (rhiza), meaning “root and/or cliff”, or the Arabic word rizqmeaning “what God and fate provide for your life”.In our everyday language we use proverbs such as “Nothing ventured, nothing gained” or “God helps the brave”.Laboratory for Energy Systems Analysis http://www.psi.ch/gabe peter.burgherr@psi.chIDRC 2012, 26-30 August 2012, Davos Switzerland Burgherr et al.: Comparative Risk Assessment

×